What cart. for the Reed 3P?

Just found a Reed 3P 12 inch  arm to go with my Dr Feickert Firebird table- What cart. do you rec. in the $2500- $3500 Used range- I was offered a Lyra Etna which was on the Reed - Was also thinking about The Soundsmith Hyperion II but open to any suggestions from the experts!! As always thanks so much for the advice!!!

Since it's been quiet here, I have had one experience with Reed.
It was a model 2, 9" arm, can't remember the letter designation.
The dealer played an EMT Tsd-15, and it was a very nice match.
It really seemed to bring flesh out the midrange.
If you want to talk with an experienced dealer, Doug White at The Voice That Is has worked with both Reed and Feickert. I'd suggest calling Doug. He's a good man. Cheers,
Hey Fluffers
I've tried my Reed 3P (18g) with Glanz FMG61, Garrott p77, Audio-Technica ART-2000, Argent MC-500HS, Grace F9F, Audio Technica AT-ML150/OCC, Fidelity Research FR-5E, Victor x1II and even Stanton 980LZS. Everything with great result (from low/mid to mid/high compliance cartridges). This is very musical tonearm. 
Like Chakster implied, it depends on the effective mass of the Reed what one would recommend, because each Reed can be had in something like six different species of wood that vary quite a bit in density.  I have a Red Cedar 10.5-inch Reed 2A (about 12-15g effective mass) currently running a Stanton 980LZS, which sounds so good that I have been too lazy to try anything else for nearly a year now.
guys thanks-sbank thanks - funny Doug is who I got the Reed from and just bought his Lyra Etna- Just need to have someone dial it in for me- Hope it is a killer combo- To all thanks for helping a newbee out!!
Dear lewm: At 15grs. your LZS  resonate at 6hz, not so good, and at 12grs. the frequency is a little better: 7hz.

With that cartridge as higher is the tonearm effective mass as lower is the frequency resonance frequency: not good for the listening quality level .

Anyway, the important issue is that you are very satisfied and this is your main target.

Btw, in that resonance frequency regards the 3P/Etna is in the " ideal " frequency range., good.

regards and enjoy the music,
@rauliruegas do you use online resonance calculator or you’re talking from personal experience?
I was quite sceptical about optimal performance of Stanton 980 LZS on my 18g Reed 3P Cocobolo "12 untill i received my cartridge and mounted it.

From my experience all those online calculatora are incorrect and i don’t trust them. I only use Hi-Fi Test LP to measure actual resonance frequency of cartridge/tonearm combo.

Don’t forget about this special brush on Stanton 980 LZS - this is really works well with 2 - 2,5g tracking force. So my samle of Stanton in actual lateral/vertical resonance test (with Hi-Fi News LP) stay between 10-7Hz!
Again: Tonearm effective mass is 18g

Maybe suspension is a bit stiff as the cartridge looks unplayed NOS, we will see after some hrs with Cardas Burn-In record. 

Dear CH: I think that this audio subject is not about to trust on something or not. It is just mathematics and you can use any calculator over the net and will gives you the same resonance frequency ( 6 hz. ). 

What we can't trust is in a test record that comes with " natural " errors " from the recording process and during playback. This is what I don't trust, mathematics are just mathematics and here it's not a " rocket science ".

Regards and enjoy the music,
ch.: """  And if you're measuring, don't trust the voice announcements on the Hi-Fi News test record. They're quite a ways off. """

that's what you can read in the Steve Hoffman site through a post in a thread spoken about.

Hmm, that's interesting, never heard about errors on Hi-Fi Test Record before. How can we measure resonanse freq. in real life with other record? Any other records (proper one) available to make sure the Hi-Fi Test record is not a good tool for it? Anyone?? 
Raul, (1) I have removed the brush entirely from my 980LZS. This probably reduces its weight by 2-3 gm. (It would be interesting to know the exact weight of the brush assembly.) And (2) with age, it is quite likely that the actual compliance of the 980LZS is lower than factory spec.

Both of these factors would tend to increase the resonant frequency somewhat, perhaps into a more acceptable zone.  As you said, it does work well, regardless.

I wrote elsewhere that I mounted an Acutex LPM320 (Compliance = 42) on my FR64S with Dynavector headshell, and amazingly there is NO problem with resonant frequency.  If the FR64S + headshell + Acutex has a collective effective mass of 30g, then the predicted RF is ~5 Hz.  My guess is that the Acutex has lost compliance.  (On the other hand, it tracks piano as well as or better than any other cartridge I own.) I do take you seriously as regards your reservations about the FR tonearms, but this combo sounds superb, much to my surprise.
Dear lewm: I use my Stantons and Pickering cartridges with ou that brush too. In theory the brush in this type of cartridges ( Shure too. ) helps to damp in some way but even that I don't like to use with.

Now, perhaps you are rigth about that the actul compliance is lower than specs and could be that way before the cartridge suspension settle down where then could be higher than specs but we can't be sure about.

Your experiences with the Acutex 320 is not different from my experiences with high mass tonearms ( I was in love with. ) but there are several reasons why is that way and first than all is that the 320 performs great in any tonearm because is a great design but ( always exist a " but " with me. ) does not means is " optimal " set up, just like us.

You, me and almost all audiophiles are accustom to very high distortions ( every kind ) through our audio life experiences.
We are accustom to because just from the begin many of us were oriented ( example ) to use tube technology on electronics when in those old times normally was acceptable 5% of distortion in that kind of electronics and the very best designs came with a " low " 1% on that distortion figure and this was not the only high distortion source in the system because in those old times no ones cares about Baerwald/Löfgren alignments in tonearm/cartridge, no one spoken about and all our cartridge set ups were way off to precision and all those set ups were surrounded by very high distortions only for that factor.
Additional does not exist TT plattforms as ( example ) Vibraplane or the like to low vibrations/distortions and everything were picked-up by our cartridges and what about room treatment?  that basically did not exist in those old times. Even how to take care about cleaned job with cartridge stylus and LP's were " arcaic "

I live with all those and fortunatelly " things " improved but in some of us that " distortions cancer " never was totally recover and like  it or not still lives in our mind.

Today you can read through different threads and posts all over the net thinks like:

"" I love this " sweet " sound  or I like more " romantic " sound. I don't like it's so bright.  """ 

and many expressions like those when the MUSIC has a natural agresiveness. It's easy to corroborate this we have just to hear at 2-3 m. a player playing a horn or piano at natural levels and we will know for sure that that swetness or romatic expressions just does not exist.

In the other side that we can't hear or be aware of distortions that does not means can't exist. We don't need to see that the tonearm/cartridge skips to know that the resonance frequency is out of the ideal range, problem is that that is happening at microscopic levels down the stylus/grooves and generating distortions.

Not always lowering distortions like us, especially at the begin with,  till we learn and over time we now accustom our " mind " to those lower audio system kind of quality performance levels.
It's a time learning system, it does not works in " automatic " because sometimes we can like those lower distortions ( depends of the kind of those distortions. ) and sometimes we take longer time for not only like it but to know why we like it.

Is a long time learning process and not easy process with no specific rules to follow other that what other people learned and share and our self experiences. We need tennacity about and never give up.

Anyway, good listening.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Please stop with the bit about distortion on tube electronics.  It would be inappropriate to reply here, but suffice to say that what you say applies to transformer coupled tube amplifiers, not to any other form of tube gear.  Well done tube preamplifiers and OTL amplifiers can compete with solid state for bench measurements, if indeed I believed those mean much.  Further, the only way solid state gets to really low numbers is by use of gobs of NFB, which generally is a cure worse than the disease.
The Lyra Etna is at the very top of the sonic pinnacle...only to be beat by its bigger brother the Atlas.  Also look at the top Ortofons...Anna or the less expensive, but fine sounding Winfield.
Dear lewm: That was only an example to show that we have a heavy " audio history "  of the kind of sound we begin and followed listening in our system. Tubes electronics is not the only source about I posted other examples and exist many more. The audio history was made it by that kind of facts and we can't change it. The subject hereb is not tubes, so stay calm.

Regards and enjoy the music,

Please correct me if I am wrong! As far as I understand, there is nothing special about this so call ideal resonance range of 8 - 12 Hz. It is just a general range to stay away from the lowest audio frequency (20Hz) and structural borne vibration (around 3 -6Hz), so these frequencies would not excite the arm/cartridge resonance.

So, if I have an arm/cartridge combo that resonate at 6Hz, but I have something like a Vibraplane, which block 90% of the vibration at 6Hz from reaching my TT, why should I worry as there is none / minimal energy at this frequency to excite my arm/cartridge. How would this affect the system's performance?

As far as I understand, other vibrations generated from within the system, such as warped or off centered LP, happen in much lower frenquency than 6Hz.
The "ideal resonance" of 8-12hz came about historically because it was below 20hz, i.e. well below the cut-off in most systems, and above 3-4hz. "3-4hz" is the typical resonant frequency of footfalls on a sprung timber floor.
The resonance frequency and amplitude can have quite an impact on overall tracking ( whether you can hear it or not ) and sound quality.
Here is a very good extract from the Shure white papers on resonance ..

what happens at the resonance frequency? One important characteristic of resonance is that motions are magnified considerably, in this case, typically from 2 to 10 times.

In both situations, the output from resonance frequency signals in the groove will be increased from 6 to 20 dB. These numbers are just the dB equivalent of the magnification numbers previously mentioned. By itself, this may not be all bad, since this resonance peak determines the low-frequency response "limit" of the pickup and system, and a bit of boost here may not be unpleasant. This was certainly true fifteen years ago, when arm resonance frequencies of 30 to 50 Hz were common. However, with modern pickups and arms, these resonance frequencies are usually subsonic (below 20 Hz), so that reproduction by the loudspeakers may cause distortion. Additionally, preamp overload is most likely to occur at boosted low frequencies since the preamp clipping level is lowest here. Consequently, the arm resonance has lost whatever usefulness it once had and must now be regarded as a liability.

The most pernicious effect of the resonance is shown in Figures 1 and 2 by the "scrubbing" notion developed by the stylus in the groove. This causes program material to warble in pitch, just as if the turntable speed were fluctuating. In fact, the groove speed is changing (relative to the tip), because a fraction of the velocity of arm vibration is added to the groove velocity. (See Appendix I.) The effect is that about 1/3 of the arm vibration velocity is alternately added to and subtracted from the groove speed. For example, at arm resonance, total amplitudes of 1/32" are easily observed by eye. If the frequency is 8 Hz (typical for high compliance pickups and average arms), the resonance velocity will be about 2 cm/sec (see Appendix II). This velocity will produce a "scrubbing" velocity of 0.6 cm/sec along the groove axis. The groove speed at a 4.5 inch radius is about 40 cm/sec; so the frequency modulation will be about 0.6/40 = 1.5% and easily audible.
Another less obvious consequence of the arm resonance is that the stylus force is "used up" when the arm is vibrating. In the previous example, if the compliance of the pickup is assumed to be 20 x 10-6 cm/dyne, 2.0 grams of stylus force will be required to accommodate the arm vibration alone. This is larger than the usual stylus force, so mistracking is quite certain at the extremes of the vibration.

The above explanation demonstrates why the Eminent Technology ET2 utilises a patented decoupled counterweight which splits the horizontal and vertical resonant frequencies (the horizontal and vertical masses are different ). This decoupled counterweight system results in 2 resonant frequencies of substantially less amplitude, the benefits of which are superior tracking and less distortion ( along with the tangential tracking ). It also explains any the removal of the decoupling spring as recommended in this forum by richardkrebs on the ET thread is ludicrous and destroys the fabric of this arm.    

Dover, thank you for the information! My question is, if we can block all, or most, of the external vibration at that resonance frequency (6Hz in my previous example) from reaching the TT by a Vibraplane or somthing similar, would that still has any affect on the tracking ?

My way of thinking is that if there isn't any 6Hz vibration (as in my example) reaching the TT, then the arm/cartridge resonance will not be excited, and the tracking will not be affected. Is there anything wrong with my thinking? Thanks

thekong - 
I would think that reducing vibration to the TT may help to reduce some tonearm/cartridge resonance if there are external vibrations that are causing instability to the TT/arm itself. However the tonearm/cartridge resonance will still come into play when playing records.
Records have massive imperfections built in - eccentricity, surface variations, bumps, warps (micro), not to mention groove imperfections. All of these will impact stylus tracking and the arm/cartridge resonance will affect the stylus/cantilever response.
Bear also in mind that there are resonances in the audio band above the fundamental resonance of the arm/cartridge and therefore some low bass in the audible region will be impacted by the arm/cartridge resonance as well as tracking distortion.  

Dover, thank you for your detailed reply!
Dear the kong:  The " ideal " frequency resonance range of 8hz-12hz is for some gentlemans not the ideal range for example: G.Merril ( of Merrill TT and AR ones. ) had an explanation that the range should be 15hz-18hz and other took 8hz-10hz.

Anyway, when we make the calculations for our tonearm/cartridge combination that calculation gives us the theoretical resonance frequency that normally is out of reality because almost all tonearm manufacturers gives the tonearm effective mass figure with out taking in count the tonearm counterweight position with that cartridge and normally too we don't take in count the weight of the hardware to mount the cartridge but exist an additional factor to take in count and that's the real cartridge compliance, this is under playback and through the time. Those factors moves the real resonance frequency on our tonearm/cartridge combinations and your Vibraplane can't helps here.

That kind of TT damping and other kind of TT damping ways can't helps to additional ssues happening down the LP/stylus/TT:

- if we have active subwoofers in our system we know that in the LP recording comes very low bass frequency lower than 10hz. Example: some London/Decca old recordings made it/recorded in the Royal Opera house comes with intermitent very low bass non musical/no music content sounds that happens came from the London subway that pass under or nearest that Hall.
In some of the RCA reissues by Chesky recordings happens the same for the same reason.

But the subway sound goes lower and affect that cartridge/tonearm resonanse frequency that affect what we are hearing because as music information " distortions " generates harmonics too.

- exist more subsonics signals in the LPs that we can imagine and are affecting and degrading what we are listening.

- something that TT damping can't helps is the " distortions/vibrations " coming from the platter/bearing ( even in air bearing designs. ) because any body/platter in movement generate ( because that movement/dynamic mass. ) vibrations/micro-vibrations transmitted throught the platter spindle and platter surface to the LP and disturb the cartridge ridding.

all those and others are focus to exite that cartridge/tonearm resonance frequency during playback and the problem is that we can't see it ( almost all happens at microscopic levels. ) even we are unaware of its damage to the musical signal.

Obviously that we must work to damp perfectly at each of those system links and those distortions sources and one way to start is try to stay between that resonance frequency range.

We can't avoid those degrading musical signal sources but at least try to have it at minimum elsewhere.

The real " magic " ( if any ) for a better quality level audio system performance is exactly that: every kind and elsewhere distortions keep it at minimum but this is more easy to say it than to do it because the first issue is to identify in precisily way where are those distortions sources.

Yes, the analog experience  is a lovely one but full of imperfections as no other music home reproduction medium.

Regards and enjoy the music,